SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1967 Supreme(Del) 4

S.K.KAPUR
SHAKUNTALA – Appellant
Versus
BHAGWAN DASS – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Harnam Das, K.DAYAL

( 1 ) BHAGWAN Dass respondent obtained a decree for possession of the land in question on November 11, 1964. The Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Amendment Act, 1964 (Act No. XLIII of 1964) came into force on 27th February, 1965. Before 27th February, 1965, however, the landlord filed an application for execution of the decree and warrants for eviction of the tenant were issued. The bailiff, however, returned the warrants with a report that there was apprehension of breach of peace and possession could not be delivered without police aid. The said Amendment Act came into force in the meantime The judgment-debtor Bled an application under S. 19 of the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956, objecting to the execution of the decree without permission from the Competent Authority under the said Act as amended in 1964. The short controversy that arises between the parties is whether it is necessary for a decree-holder to obtain permission of the Authority under the said Act before executing the decree? The trial Court by judgment dated 10th December, 1965, decided that Cl. (b) of S. 19 as amended by Act XLIII of 1964 applied only to decrees or orders obtained after comi








Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top